I love the xpack so far. As a currently top 10 US guild raider I find the raid encounters pretty well done. The world is beautiful as well, with loads to do.

My very casual wife, who also plays is loving it as well. The heroic dungeons are tuned fine for her level of play, and she's had fun doing the achievements and all the quests ect.

Besides PVP this xpack is right up there. It's sure not burning crusade but there won't ever be another like that. I personally think it beat the death out of wrath and cat thus far. With tons more to come.

So we're suppose to base opinion as fact from 21 people who reviewed the game ? Does that not sound really stupid to anyone else ? Regardless I could care less, I'm enjoying the game and don't need a critic to tell me otherwise. Even then, critics suck and aren't worth taking at face value.

Sorry, yes. I'm not reading your review or looking at your score based off of how the last expansion pissed you(the reviewer off). If i wanted to know about the other expansion I'd go look there. I got to your review on MoP to read about the stuff in MoP.

If MoP turns out as badly for the remainder of the expansion again as Cataclysm then people won't be able to complain about us having given it a 95/100 again.

So we're suppose to base opinion as fact from 21 people who reviewed the game ? Does that not sound really stupid to anyone else ? Regardless I could care less, I'm enjoying the game and don't need a critic to tell me otherwise. Even then, critics suck and aren't worth taking at face value.

The funny part is those 21 people gave the game really good reviews, its the user reviews are the bad ones & those can be faked very easily majority of them were made less than 24 hours of MoP being out.

Originally Posted by Slant

TL;DR: Did raiding kill WoW? Nope. But catering the game to people who clearly shouldn't be playing it did.

It is around 83%. This is the worst score a WoW expansion has ever had, and way below the expectations of what people predicted.

I'm not trying to start a war of words here, I'm pointed out factual data we now have regarding the quality of the expansion.

EDIT: We're not talking about the USER SUBMITTED REVIEWS on metacritic here (which can be ignored), we're talking about the actual CRITIC Reviews from respected people like IGN, eurogamer and gamespot.

None of these critics are actually respected, they are greedy hoes that will sell their soul for any kind of payment.

Knowing that, they probably have been bought by several competitors to slam Blizzard into the ground.

If you allowed yourself to use your brain you'd know, you can't really say x expansion is worse than expansion y z b c or something untill the next expansion hits. If MoP ends with more subs than Cataclysm, it will be better than all previous expansions excluding wrath. The fact that MoP hasn't launched in China yet, makes these reports even more bullshit. Didn't they also say Swotr and Rift would be hits? Same for GW? Guess what, they aren't and will never be anything but failures.

So there you have it, IGN, Eurogamer and Gamespot derived to the pile of donkey poop they actually are.

Gaming journalism is somewhere next to Fox News as far as trustworthy sources go in regards to video game quality unless you're talking about individual blogs, because any smart gaming review site will pander to whoever pays their ad space.

It is around 83%. This is the worst score a WoW expansion has ever had, and way below the expectations of what people predicted.

I'm not trying to start a war of words here, I'm pointed out factual data we now have regarding the quality of the expansion.

EDIT: We're not talking about the USER SUBMITTED REVIEWS on metacritic here (which can be ignored), we're talking about the actual CRITIC Reviews from respected people like IGN, eurogamer and gamespot.

It is around 83%. This is the worst score a WoW expansion has ever had, and way below the expectations of what people predicted.

I'm not trying to start a war of words here, I'm pointed out factual data we now have regarding the quality of the expansion.

EDIT: We're not talking about the USER SUBMITTED REVIEWS on metacritic here (which can be ignored), we're talking about the actual CRITIC Reviews from respected people like IGN, eurogamer and gamespot.

Dude....player reviews are what matters. I have never trusted a critic on a game or a movie or anything, they are over critical and foolish in most cases. Some of my favorite games received 7 or below from the critics.

SO the "expert" critics are telling all of us were are fools and morons for liking this game?

Same reason as to why Gordon Ramsey might walk into your favourite restaurant and starts spitting the food back out and calling the chef a donkey.

That's an often made comparison by reviewers during Cataclysm, a lot of professional game reviewers were absolutely dumb founded as to why millions of people were enjoying Dragon Soul for more than 10 months. Such will remain a riddle for a long time I'm afraid, because there was absolutely nothing positive to write about the game in the era of the 4.3 patch.

If MoP turns out as badly for the remainder of the expansion again as Cataclysm then people won't be able to complain about us having given it a 95/100 again.

Curriculum plays an important part in what scores games get.

Then MMOs should have launch reviews and end reviews. Cataclysm could have deserved a 95 at launch and lower at end. Previous expansions are no reason to lower a new expansions reviews if the new one is good at launch.